Medina—The First Muslim Refugee Resettlement Program

“Whether or not a particular group of refugees has been infiltrated by ISIS, there remains the fact that many refugees subscribe to the same general worldview held by members of the Islamic State. After all, they’ve been steeped in the same cultural-religious milieu that produced the terrorists.”

With all the talk about the Syrian refugees, one point is often overlooked. Much of the debate focuses on the question of whether or not the refugees can be reliably vetted. If they can be certified as one hundred percent terrorist-free, then, presumably, the resettlement can safely proceed.

But even if every terrorist could be excluded from the ranks of the refugees, a problem would remain. Many analysts are concerned that the resettlement program might facilitate the growth of terrorist-tolerant communities in America. By “terrorist-tolerant” I don’t mean that its members are thinking every minute about what they can do to support jihad, but rather that they have come to take for granted things that aren’t assumed in other societies.

Terror, for instance. Nonie Darwish, a former Muslim who grew up in Egypt, puts it this way:

One of the reasons that the so-called moderate Muslims have become irrelevant … is that over the centuries they have become tolerant of Islamic terrorism and considered it as part of normal life.

“Life under Sharia itself is a life under terror,” observes Darwish. And that daily low-level terrorism accustoms Muslims to view it as something “like a natural disaster or part of life that must be tolerated.”

So, although a Syrian refugee may have no personal taste for terror, he can be surprisingly tolerant of it. A 2007 public opinion poll of Syrians revealed that 75 percent of those polled supported financial aid for Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and “Iraqi fighters” (at that time, mostly al-Qaeda). Need it be mentioned that all these groups are designated as terrorist organizations by the U.S. government? A more recent poll of 1,365 Syrians found that one out of five considered ISIS to be a positive influence on the country. And living in the West doesn’t seem to change these attitudes. A 2014 opinion poll showed that 27 percent of the French population in the 18-24-year-old demographic supported ISIS. Assuming a random sample, and assuming that the majority of pro-ISIS respondents were Muslim, that would mean that the vast majority of young French Muslims support ISIS.

That kind of supportive environment is a factor that’s often overlooked in the debate over Syrian refugees. As defenders of the resettlement program like to point out, terrorists can get into the U.S. by other means than by mingling with refugees. But once here, they need a network to support them and give them cover. And the network itself can only function if the larger community is willing to look the other way.

Europe is now dotted with such networks—in the Paris suburbs, in the Brussels borough of Molenbeek, in the Neukölln district of Berlin, and in numerous other places. There is evidence that similar networks already exist in nascent form in the U.S. Beyond the question of whether terrorists will mix in with refugees lies a larger question about the refugee resettlement program. Will it contribute to a strengthening of our society, or will it lead instead to the strengthening and expansion of terror-supportive networks?

Whether or not a particular group of refugees has been infiltrated by ISIS, there remains the fact that many refugees subscribe to the same general worldview held by members of the Islamic State. After all, they’ve been steeped in the same cultural-religious milieu that produced the terrorists. Many of them will take it for granted that Islam is the supreme religion, that Muhammad was the perfect man, and that Jews and Christians are unclean. They may be averse to committing violence, but they may find it perfectly understandable if other Muslims resort to violence in order to avenge a real or perceived insult to Islam. Although that mindset is alien to us, it shouldn’t be incomprehensible. At the time that a death fatwa was issued against the author Salman Rushdie, I remember talking with several Catholics who felt quite sympathetic to the Ayatollah Khomeini (who issued the fatwa), and rather unsympathetic to Rushdie and his “blasphemous” attitude toward religion.

Given their cultural background, it’s reasonable to expect that Sunni Muslim refugees will bring with them a set of beliefs and attitudes conducive to the incubation of terrorism. Even if there were a foolproof method for excluding active terrorists from their midst, there is no way of vetting for future terrorists—young Muslims who at some point in their development decide that ISIS or some similar movement is the logical conclusion of all they have been taught….

As concerns the Syrian refugee crisis, Christians are regularly reminded that the Holy Family were once refugees in Egypt. Yes, but the culture brought into the world by the Holy Family is worlds apart from the one introduced six centuries later by Muhammad.

Let’s not forget that the Holy Family were once refugees. But in regard to the present crisis there’s another and perhaps more appropriate analogy to consider: Muhammad and his followers were also once refugees. He and his group of about 100 men, women, and children had long overstayed their welcome in Mecca. According to Muslim chroniclers, they had to flee in order to avoid persecution. Fortunately for Muhammad, the more “enlightened” citizens of Medina extended an invitation to the Muslims to come and live in their city. It is not recorded whether or not they held up large “welcome refugees” banners as is now the custom at European train stations, but they soon enough experienced the kind of regrets that Europeans are now having. Muhammad gradually acquired wealth and converts, and within a half-dozen years he was the master of Medina. Those Medinans who were not exiled or slaughtered were thoroughly subjugated. Muhammad then used Medina as the launching pad for his conquest of all Arabia. Within a century of his death, his followers had conquered nearly half of the civilized world….

Comments

I am confident of speaking for many JW readers when saying “Thank you” to Mr. Sidway for his superb contributions.

I always learn from them, and by the context surrounding what he writes, see Islam in a clearer way.

Robert wrote a post which is closely related to this item — titled “The Hijrah Into Europe” — on September 3 or 4, if my ancient memory is correct. Highly recommended as an adjunct to the author’s remarks here.

Among the tidal-wave of significant submissions that appear on the JW site, this is one of those that should be reposted on all of the affiliate sites as a thoughtfull challenge to the insanity of the West’s wide-open door to Islamic imigration. Also, I would encourage those who post their own submissions to write their own versions of this neglected aspect of the anti-Islamic argument. A great post – Thanks.

“One of the reasons that the so-called moderate Muslims have become irrelevant … is that over the centuries they have become tolerant of Islamic terrorism and considered it as part of normal life.”

Interesting idea, in light of which “moderate” Muslims who support and defend Islam in the West are not necessarily part of a taqqiyah-based stealth jihad — instead, the ‘moderates” act the way they do because they think terror is normal and are thus in denial about it — for them therefore terror is not something out of the ordinary that makes Islam a culture the West should exclude. “Moderates” do not support terror, but have no intention of trying to stop it, because for Islam it’s just an unfortunate part of life and the moderates take for granted there is no way to stop it. “Moderate” Muslims thus remind me of the relative who has some severe problem like a drug addiction or a habit of wife-beating but is in denial about it, thinks it normal, and demands you accept him into your life as he is and without conditions.

The “moderate” thus often knows that jihad terror is an inextricable “byproduct” of Islam. The “moderate” dislikes the “byproduct,” but is prepared to tolerate it rather than give up Islam. The “moderate” therefore in a sense takes jihad terror on board for the long haul and accustoms himself to it as something that will always be there, even though he doesn’t want it. It becomes normal to him, and he thus thinks he is as entitled as a member of any other group to join any society. If he has internalized the Islamic supremacism of the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira, he will think he is more entitled and has greater rights than any non-Muslim.

One last point. The fact that the “moderates” tolerate Islamic terrorism as an inevitable part of normal life, like death and taxes, shows that when such “moderates” tell you Islam has been hijacked by the terrorists, the “moderates” who say so are lying to you and/or to themselves. The very fact that the “moderates” tolerate Islamic terror as normal shows that jihad has not hijacked the religion but is a central part of it.

I’m astonished that Robert Spencer missed this detail. They didn’t bother with the writing part because most people in Medina were illiterate, but they had the oral equivalent of the “Welcome, Refugees” banner.

“They [advance party of Muslims] were waiting as usual but when the sun became too hot they returned to their houses. In the meantime a Jew cried from above his castle in a loud voice: ‘O Banu Qaylah! Here is your master; he has arrived.’ They came out, and lo! there was the Apostle of Allah with his three Companions … They came and said, ‘Stay, you are safe and secure.’ I did not see a day of more happy than that of the arrival of the Prophet, so much so that I heard the women, the children and the slave-girls saying: ‘This is the Apostle of Allah, and he has come, he has come!’ … I never saw the people expressing more joy than on that occasion. I noticed babies and children saying: ‘This is the Apostle of Allah, who has come to us.’ …I came along with other people to have a glance of him.” (Ibn Saad/Haq 1:271-273).

The story goes on to describe how they squabbled over the honour of hosting the Prophet in their homes. They happily extended hospitality to the immigrants inside their homes until the Muslims had built their own village.

A little more than five years later, the greatest chief in Medina complained that anyone who did not submit to Muhammad was likely to be driven out of the city. His own son offered to kill him for saying so (Ibn Ishaq/Guillaume 191ff).

My father was born in a border county in Ireland. Extremely high concentration of PIRA activity. Extremely high.

One day back in the 70s, my aunt and I went for a walk in the town she lived. She would whisper to me, “He’s in the IRA,” if we passed someone who was in the group. I would say that very close to 100% of the people we walked by were “in the IRA.”

So, why wasn’t the Republic of Ireland able to clear out that nest of fighters. Simply because the non-IRA population either tolerated or were “sympathetic to the cause” (words which I heard pass the lips of many I met).

That’s exactly what happens in the Islamic community. They believe their way of life is superior and they are happy to support terrorists who use weapons to impose that way of life on us.

Wake up America and see Islam for what it is: a powerful demonic force. The fact that it is demonic gives it particular power against which our democratic posturing is impotent. The Bible calls Satan the ‘god of this world’. Satan has enormous power for the moment and he uses that power to provide victory to Islam. Islam will prevail unless opposed by the power of the true God. Anyting else is impotent against what is driven by the god of this world. Rediscover your Christian faith America and find strength in Christ, – or bow to Islam.

Popular Categories

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.